[go: up one dir, main page]

US20160296902A1 - Deterministic feedback blender - Google Patents

Deterministic feedback blender Download PDF

Info

Publication number
US20160296902A1
US20160296902A1 US15/185,658 US201615185658A US2016296902A1 US 20160296902 A1 US20160296902 A1 US 20160296902A1 US 201615185658 A US201615185658 A US 201615185658A US 2016296902 A1 US2016296902 A1 US 2016296902A1
Authority
US
United States
Prior art keywords
concentration
component
chemical fluid
inline
chemical
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Abandoned
Application number
US15/185,658
Inventor
Kevin T. O'Dougherty
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Air Liquide Electronics US LP
Original Assignee
Air Liquide Electronics US LP
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Air Liquide Electronics US LP filed Critical Air Liquide Electronics US LP
Priority to US15/185,658 priority Critical patent/US20160296902A1/en
Publication of US20160296902A1 publication Critical patent/US20160296902A1/en
Assigned to AIR LIQUIDE ELECTRONICS U.S. LP reassignment AIR LIQUIDE ELECTRONICS U.S. LP ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: O'DOUGHERTY, KEVIN T.
Priority to US16/293,981 priority patent/US10739795B2/en
Abandoned legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • B01F15/0408—
    • B01F15/00207—
    • B01F15/0022—
    • B01F15/00227—
    • B01F15/00233—
    • B01F15/0479—
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
    • G05D—SYSTEMS FOR CONTROLLING OR REGULATING NON-ELECTRIC VARIABLES
    • G05D11/00—Control of flow ratio
    • G05D11/02—Controlling ratio of two or more flows of fluid or fluent material
    • G05D11/13—Controlling ratio of two or more flows of fluid or fluent material characterised by the use of electric means
    • G05D11/135—Controlling ratio of two or more flows of fluid or fluent material characterised by the use of electric means by sensing at least one property of the mixture
    • G05D11/138—Controlling ratio of two or more flows of fluid or fluent material characterised by the use of electric means by sensing at least one property of the mixture by sensing the concentration of the mixture, e.g. measuring pH value
    • B01F2215/0036—

Definitions

  • Methods and systems for high precision, continuous blending of mixtures, and particularly mixtures having at least two distinct chemical compounds are disclosed. More particularly, the disclosed methods and systems provide high precision, inline blending of, among others, buffered oxide etch mixtures containing water, ammonium fluoride, and hydrofluoric acid.
  • chemical delivery systems are used to supply chemicals to processing tools.
  • Illustrative industries include the semiconductor, pharmaceutical, biomedical, food processing, household product, personal care product, or petroleum industries.
  • the chemicals being delivered by a given chemical delivery system depend, of course, on the particular processes being performed. Accordingly, the particular chemicals supplied to a semiconductor processing tool depend upon the processes being performed inside the tool. Illustrative semiconductor processes include etching, cleaning, chemical mechanical polishing (CMP), and wet deposition (e.g., spin-on, copper electroless, electroplating, etc.).
  • mixtures are combined to form the desired mixture for the particular process.
  • the mixtures may be prepared in batches, on- or off-site, and then shipped to the processing location.
  • the mixtures may be prepared at the point-of-use using a suitable blender system.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 6,050,283 to Air Liquide America Corp. discloses a system and method for mixing and/or diluting ultrapure fluids, such as liquid acids, for semiconductor processing.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 6,799,883 to Air Liquide America L.P. discloses a method and apparatus for continuously blending a chemical solution for use in semiconductor processing.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 6,923,568 to Celerity, Inc. discloses a method and apparatus for blending and supplying process materials, particularly ultra-high purity chemicals.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 7,344,297 to Air Liquide Electronics U.S., LP discloses a method and apparatus for asynchronous blending and supply of chemical solutions.
  • inline or “continuous” means that the blending process substantially simultaneously feeds the chemicals to while removing the product mixture from a mixing zone without interruption.
  • the inline blending process is distinct from a “batch” process, in which defined quantities of chemicals are mixed, typically in a mixing tank, to produce a batch, or specific quantity, of the product mixture.
  • slurry means a chemically active or buffered solution containing suspended solids. Slurries are typically used to remove and/or planarize deposited materials.
  • the term “species” means atoms, molecules, molecular fragments, ions, etc. resulting from the methods disclosed.
  • the disclosed blending methods of any of the components, fluids, acids, bases, oxidizers, reducers, or chemicals disclosed herein may produce species (i.e., atoms, molecules, molecular fragments, ions, etc.) of the item subject to blending.
  • the phrase “maintaining a target concentration in the mixture of Component X within # % w/w” means not permitting the concentration of the mixture to exceed the # % w/w difference from the target concentration.
  • Inline blending methods are disclosed.
  • the components that are blended may alter each other's assays, complicating the standard inline blending processes which typically mix components based on volume or mass.
  • Component A, Component B, and a solvent are mixed in an inline blender to form a mixture.
  • the mixture is analyzed downstream of the inline blender to determine the concentration of Component A and the concentration of Component B.
  • a target concentration in the mixture of Component A is maintained within 0.008% w/w and a target concentration in the mixture of Component B is maintained within 0.22% w/w by adjusting the flow rate of Component A, Component B, and/or the solvent based on the concentration of Component A and the concentration of Component B.
  • the disclosed inline blending methods may include one or more of the following aspects:
  • Methods of mixing chemical fluids in an inline blender to produce a mixture having a concentration of the chemical fluids within 0.22% w/w of a target concentration are also disclosed.
  • a first chemical fluid is introduced into an inline blender via a first flow control device.
  • a second chemical fluid is introduced into the inline blender via a second flow control device.
  • a third chemical fluid is introduced into the inline blender via a third flow control device.
  • the first chemical fluid, the second chemical fluid, and the third chemical fluid are mixed in a mixing zone of the inline blender to form a mixture.
  • the mixture is monitored downstream from the mixing zone for a first chemical fluid concentration and a second chemical fluid concentration.
  • the first flow control device is adjusted based on the first chemical fluid concentration.
  • the second flow control device is adjusted based on the second chemical fluid concentration.
  • the disclosed methods may include one or more of the following aspects:
  • a solvent is introduced into an inline blender via a first flow control device.
  • An acid is introduced into the inline blender via a second flow control device.
  • a base is introduced into the inline blender via a third flow control device.
  • the acid, base, and solvent are mixed in a mixing zone of the inline blender to form a mixture.
  • the mixture is monitored downstream from the mixing zone for an acid concentration and a base concentration.
  • the second flow control device is adjusted based on the acid concentration.
  • the third flow control device is adjusted based on the base concentration.
  • Methods of mixing an oxidizer and a reducer in an inline blender to produce a mixture having a consistent concentration are also disclosed.
  • a solvent is introduced into an inline blender via a first flow control device.
  • An oxidizer is introduced into the inline blender via a second flow control device.
  • a reducer is introduced into the inline blender via a third flow control device.
  • the oxidizer, reducer, and solvent are mixed in a mixing zone of the inline blender to form a mixture.
  • the mixture is monitored downstream from the mixing zone for an oxidizer concentration and a reducer concentration.
  • the second flow control device is adjusted based on the oxidizer concentration.
  • the third flow control device is adjusted based on the reducer concentration.
  • the disclosed methods may include one or more of the following aspects:
  • An inline chemical blender for mixing chemicals in real-time is also disclosed.
  • Three chemical fluid flow control devices communicate three chemical fluids from their sources to a mixing zone of the inline chemical blender.
  • Three sensors are located downstream of the mixing zone, one of which monitors the temperature of the mixture and two of which measure the concentrations of two of the chemical fluids in the mixture.
  • the disclosed inline chemical blender may include one or more of the following aspects:
  • FIG. 1 is a block schematic diagram of a prior art inline blender
  • FIG. 2 is a graph showing concentration (wt. %) versus conductivity (mS/cm) of two blend points produced by the prior art inline blender of FIG. 1 ;
  • FIG. 3 is a block schematic diagram of an inline blender with a proposed offline chemical analysis feedforward step
  • FIG. 4 is a block schematic diagram of the disclosed inline blender
  • FIG. 5 is a graph showing pH versus HF concentration for different molarity NH 4 F solutions.
  • FIG. 6 is the graph demonstrating how to select the pH and conductivity set points necessary to produce the blend having the desired concentration, notwithstanding the assay of the source materials.
  • Metrology-based feedback inline blenders use techniques such as conductivity, pH, refractive index, density, turbidity, and other measurements, in order to control the flow rate of the chemicals and maintain the final blended material specification.
  • Previous continuous inline blenders of the type schematically represented in FIG. 1 , have a series of “Blend Points” with one constituent species added at each blend point and controlled locally with a feedback metrology device, typically conductivity, but also Refractive Index, pH, Ultra Sonic, densitometers, etc.
  • the first complication to final blend accuracy in these series of continuous inline blenders arises at the second blend point.
  • the concentration of the first blend point is immune to the single species source assay, such as 49% HF acid, because the first series blend point with feedback provides for the correct first blend point assay even if the chemical source is 48% HF acid.
  • the feedback from the first blend point allows more flow of the 48% HF source to compensate.
  • the second blendpoint is not immune to the single species source assay, even when the second chemical source is a single species, such as NH 4 F having no other added species, such as HF or NH 3 .
  • the single species NH 4 F source assay varies from the expected 40% NH 4 F w/w (e.g., 39% or 41% NH 4 F w/w)
  • the addition of the second chemical having an assay that differs from expected results in an improper concentration of the first chemical in the final solution.
  • Concentration control is further impacted when the two chemical compounds to be blended alter each other's concentrations.
  • prior art systems use of subsequent sensors to measure the concentration of each sequentially added component fails to address the impact a subsequent component may have on the concentration of an earlier component.
  • some solutions cannot be blended without ambiguous output based upon the prior art single component/single sensor embodiment. For example, any traces of NH 3 or HF in NH 4 F may negatively affect the total HF concentration in a buffered oxide etch solution.
  • Source Immunity This describes the level to which the final inline blend concentration target can be maintained with variations in the concentration of the input source chemicals.
  • Single Species Source Immunity exists only at the first blend point. In other words, the final output of the blending with feedback from a conductivity signal for simple HF dilution blending is immune to the input HF concentration (i.e., 48% wt/wt, 49% wt/wt, 46% wt/wt, etc.).
  • the precise source assay input must be known and constant, or concentration or dilution of the first constituent may take place and result in an out of specification assay condition for the first component at the second and/or third blend points.
  • the second component may be out of specification at the third and fourth blend points.
  • NH 4 F may include H 2 O, OH ⁇ , NH 4 F, NH 3 , NH 4 + , HF, H + , and F ⁇ .
  • any HF or F— present therein may alter the concentration of HF in the final blend.
  • the final assay may also include free species in the gas phase due to difficulty controlling the final gas phase end point.
  • Buffered chemical solutions using salt buffers are particularly afflicted by the limitations of the prior art continuous inline blenders.
  • many buffered oxide etch formulations will use an ammonium fluoride (i.e., NH 4 F) salt buffer to create a buffered hydrofluoric acid solution for etch control.
  • the original NH 4 F solution is manufactured by dissolving NH 3 gas into a hydrofluoric acid solution and attempting to stop the manufacturing process at the neutral point (i.e., the point at which there is no excess HF or NH 3 in the solution). If the reaction is stopped too early, the final ammonium fluoride becomes HF rich and if the reaction is stopped late, the resulting ammonium fluoride would be NH 3 rich.
  • the entire ammonium fluoride salt buffer may be generated from the gas phase by first dissolving anhydrous HF into water to form HF acid and then dissolving NH 3 gas into the HF acid to formulate the ammonium fluoride.
  • the reaction is stopped too early, the final ammonium fluoride becomes HF rich and if the reaction is stopped late, the resulting ammonium fluoride would be NH 3 rich.
  • the final blend assay is affected by the unknown and non-constant free species in the ammonium fluoride source material.
  • UPW Ultrapure Water
  • the UPW 100 may be delivered to blendpoint 250 using a flow meter (not shown).
  • the HF 200 may be delivered to blendpoint 250 using a proportioning valve (not shown).
  • the proportioning valve may deliver more or less HF 200 to the blendpoint 250 based on temperature corrected conductivity feedback 251 to achieve the desired dilute HF assay.
  • the dilute HF produced at blendpoint 250 is at the desired concentration independent of the actual HF 200 source assay (i.e., source immunity).
  • the dilute HF produced at blendpoint 250 is then blended with ammonium fluoride 300 , which may contain free NH 3 or HF, at blendpoint 350 to produce the buffered oxide etch solution 400 .
  • ammonium fluoride 300 may be delivered either directly to the processing equipment or to a drain.
  • the ammonium fluoride 300 may be delivered to blendpoint 350 using a proportioning valve (not shown).
  • the first general error may arise as a function of the actual ammonium fluoride assay—40.0%+/ ⁇ 1% NH 4 F by wt. If this assay is not known and held constant across all sources of ammonium fluoride 300 , the HF assay in the buffered oxide etch solution 400 may be forced out of specification. In addition, the final HF concentration may be affected by the unknown and non-constant free species, NH 3 or HF, existing in the gas phase production generation of ammonium fluoride source material 300 . The final free HF assay in the buffered oxide etch solution 400 typically requires a very high tolerance due to the sensitive process in which the etch solution is used.
  • the buffered oxide etch solution 400 only produces acceptable HF assays for one exact and specific assay of the ammonium fluoride source material 300 , for example 40.0% NH 4 F and 0.05% Free HF by wt.
  • the blender set points must be changed to produce the required buffered oxide etch solution assays.
  • the ammonium fluoride assay may be performed using titration, functional silicon wafer etch tests, or a combination of both, all of which are time consuming and time sensitive.
  • the UPW 100 , HF 200 , and NH 4 F 300 are retrieved from industry standard storage units.
  • the storage units are in fluid communication with blendpoint 250 and 350 .
  • Blendpoint 250 and 350 are in fluid communication with a drain (not shown) and processing equipment (not shown).
  • supply lines supply the UPW 100 , HF 200 , and NH 4 F 300 to the blendpoints 250 and 350 .
  • supply lines supply the resulting buffered oxide etch solution to a drain (not shown) or processing equipment (not shown).
  • the supply lines are industry standard supply lines.
  • the supply lines may include flow control devices, such as orifices, flow control valves, stepper throttles, or combinations thereof; valves, such as check valves or electronic valves; and/or pressure regulators.
  • Blendpoint 250 or 350 is a mixing zone, also known as an inline blender.
  • the mixing zone may be a tube or pipe having an unrestricted flow path.
  • the mixing zone may be a T junction.
  • the tube or pipe may include an element to induce mixing, such as a static mixer, a stirrer, a vortex element, or combinations thereof.
  • an element to induce mixing such as a static mixer, a stirrer, a vortex element, or combinations thereof.
  • the suitable mixing zone will be determined based upon both the mixing conditions required and pressure necessary at the point of use. More particularly, a viscous solution or slurry may require more forceful mixing than a flowing solution and, as a result, an element to induce mixing. However, an element to induce mixing may result in loss of pressure across the system.
  • the mixing zone necessary based on equipment setup and the product to be mixed.
  • the supply line downstream of blendpoint 250 or 350 includes a sensor (not shown) that measures a characteristic of the blend.
  • exemplary sensors include conductivity meters, pH meters, refractometers, turbidity monitors, Raman spectrometers, infrared spectrometers, a densitometer, an ultra-sonic meter, spectrometers, and particle counters.
  • the sensors provide real-time feedback (i.e., 251 , 351 ) to the relevant flow control device and adjusts the flow rate based on the analysis results. For example, if the conductivity is a little high, a conductivity meter may instruct the flow control device for HF 100 to decrease the flow rate.
  • the sensor may instruct a valve in the line to divert the solution to the drain.
  • the sensors and flow control devices may communicate via a controller.
  • the communication may occur via electrical wiring or wireless communication links.
  • the controller may include a processor that is programmable to implement any one or more suitable types of process control, such as proportional-integral-derivative (PID) feedback control.
  • PID proportional-integral-derivative
  • Exemplary controllers include the PLC Simatic S7-300 system from Siemens Corp. Also commonly used are Allen Bradley CompactLogix PLC Control and the Allen Bradley RSLogix programming suite.
  • FIG. 2 is a graph that illustrates the resulting two blend point operating curve that demonstrates the inadequacy of the prior art inline blender of FIG. 1 .
  • the graph shows the conductivity (in mS/cm) versus concentration (in wt. %) of two blend points: 250 and 350 .
  • Point 250 provides the concentration and conductivity of the solution at blendpoint 250 in FIG. 1 , more particularly, 0.08% w/w HF and 3.300 mS/cm.
  • Point 350 provides the concentration and conductivity of the solution from blendpoint 350 in FIG. 1 , more particularly, 14.8% w/w NH 4 F and 160 mS/cm.
  • the operating curve shown in FIG. 2 is only valid for one unique ammonium fluoride source 300 assay.
  • the blendpoint 250 is set to 3.300 mS/cm and the HF is added from source HF 200 until a conductivity of 3.300 mS/cm is reached at blendpoint 250 .
  • NH 4 F is then added from source NH 4 F 300 at blendpoint 350 to a conductivity of 160 mS/cm. If the ammonium fluoride source 300 changes, the 3.300 mS/cm setting at blendpoint 250 will no longer be valid to obtain the final required buffered HF 400 solution.
  • a unique blendpoint 250 must be found for every ammonium fluoride source 300 assay as explained above.
  • a “Feedforward” step was proposed that includes the assay of the ammonium fluoride 300 and the amount of free species NH 3 or HF to alter the setpoint for HF source at the blendpoint 250 analysis.
  • a block schematic of this proposal is shown in FIG. 3 .
  • An automated means (not shown) provides the concentration of free species and ammonium fluoride in the ammonium fluoride source 300 to blendpoint 250 as indicated by the feedforward step 352 .
  • the automated means must remain accurate for the NH 4 F assay as well as free species NH 3 or HF across a full domain of source 300 input possibilities, pH for example, vs. just one single value—the final disclosed blender setpoint.
  • Blendpoint 352 of FIGS. 2 and 3 must remain fixed because the final buffered oxide etch solution 400 assay must be fixed.
  • FIG. 4 is a block schematic of the inline blender that solves the problems that have not been resolved in the prior art.
  • blendpoint 250 of FIGS. 1 and 3 has been eliminated and blendpoint 350 now provides temperature compensated pH feedback 251 to the proportioning valve (not shown) for HF 200 and temperature compensated conductivity feedback 351 to the proportioning valve (not shown) for the ammonium fluoride source 300 .
  • an Initial, Change, Equilibrium (“ICE”) matrix for the components to be reacted may be established to determine the sensor settings needed.
  • K a is the acid dissociation constant
  • [HA] is the molar concentration of the un-dissociated weak acid
  • [A ⁇ ] is the molar concentration of the conjugate base of HA.
  • FIG. 5 is a graph showing pH of the blend versus HF molar concentration for different molarity NH 4 F solutions.
  • the FIG. 5 graph shows a family of curves representing the molarity of the salt buffer NH 4 F. 10 curves are shown for NH 4 F molarity ranging from 0.5 M to 5.0 M. The molarity of the NH 4 F buffer solution provides the desired conductivity reading.
  • the solid line represents 0.5 M NH 4 F; the dotted line represents 1.0 M NH 4 F; the triangled line represents 1.5 M NH 4 F; the squared line represents 2.0 M NH 4 F; the dot-dash line represents 2.5 M NH 4 F; the dashed line represents 3.0 M NH 4 F; the dot-dot-dash line represents 3.5 M NH 4 F; the circled line represents 4.0 M NH 4 F; the line represents 4.5 M NH 4 F; and the diamond line represents 5.0 M NH 4 F.
  • Data of concentration versus conductivity for various chemicals are published at 25° C. For each molarity of NH 4 F above, a specific temperature compensated conductivity is manifested. For highest accuracy in the disclosed blender, the actual temperature compensated conductivity at each salt buffer concentration is determined empirically.
  • Each NH 4 F molarity curve intersects the pH and HF concentration axes at different points.
  • the desired concentration of the oxide etch buffer solution may be selected to determine the needed molarity/conductivity of the NH 4 F and pH of the resulting oxide etch buffer solution. For example, as shown in FIG. 6 , if the desired blend contains 14.8% NH 4 F by wt. (4.00 M or 160.00 mS/cm) and 0.08000% HF by wt (0.04 M), the resulting pH is 5.1.
  • the resulting setpoints for the blender sensors using this example are:
  • just one blend point 350 may be used as the confluence of all the constituents, and feedback is established to obtain the setpoints from the operating curve shown in FIG. 5 .
  • the blender occupies a smaller footprint than the prior art multi-blend point inline blender and further may require less maintenance.
  • NH 4 F Molarity/Concentration is automatically controlled with a “Reverse Acting”, (SP-PV), traditional PID algorithm—as conductivity rises, NH 4 F flow drops via the PID algorithm.
  • SP-PV Reverse Acting
  • the HF Molarity/Concentration is automatically controlled with a “Direct Acting”, (PV-SP), traditional PID algorithm—as pH rises, HF flow increases via PID algorithm.
  • PV-SP Direct Acting
  • final blend assay is controlled by automatically via the PID feedback as explained above to maintain the desired conductivity and pH and thus the final stable and consistent NH 4 F and HF assay.
  • the final blend does not change as a function of the origin of the free HF species—either in the HF source or the NH 4 F source as long as the six species alone are present, mixing is complete, chemical equilibrium is established, and process variables are temperature compensated as discussed previously.
  • the bulk concentration of salt in the source NH 4 F effect the final blend assay, but instead simply by the flow of NH 4 F driven from the Reverse Acting PID algorithm.
  • the resulting solutions/slurries having the desired concentration may be prepared on-demand without worrying about any changes to the concentrations of the starting materials. More particularly, the disclosed methods produce solutions and slurries on demand that are able to maintain concentrations within 0.22% w/w of the desired concentration. Depending on the chemical and measuring technique, the concentration may be maintained within 0.008% w/w of the desired goal. As shown in the examples that follow, this is an improvement over the results obtained using the prior art blender of FIG. 1 .
  • abrasive particles such as silica (SiO 2 ), alumina (Al 2 O 3 ), calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ), ceria (CeO 2 ), zirconia (ZrO 2 ), or titania (TiO2) in a basic solution such as NH 4 OH/ammonium acetate/H 2 O or NaHCO 3 /NaOH/H 2 O or an acidic solution such as NH 4 F/HF/H 2 O.
  • solutions such as NH 4 OH/H 2 O 2 /H 2 O, HCl/H 2 O 2 /H 2 O, or H 2 SO 4 /H 2 O 2 /H 2 O or slurries containing abrasive particles, such as silica (SiO 2 ), alumina (Al 2 O 3 ), calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ), ceria (CeO 2 ), zirconia (ZrO 2 ), or titania (TiO2) in
  • the inline blender of FIG. 4 was built in the research laboratory to determine whether the final concentration was maintained after changing NH 4 F source 300 . Due to the research settings and waste management requirements, the concentrations in these examples are less than typically encountered in the industry.
  • the trial runs were performed with an Ultra Pure Water (UPW) flow rate of 1.75 liters per minute (Lpm) flowing from UPW source 100 .
  • UPW Ultra Pure Water
  • Lpm liters per minute
  • a pH probe and conductivity probe for feedback elements 251 and 351 was added after blendpoint 350 .
  • a PTFE six stage static mixer purchased from Edlon Inc. was used for blendpoint 350 .
  • Each Feedback Metrology Subsystem was tuned and optimized for this UPW flow rate for maximum stability/response. This was accomplished using the resident onboard Allen Bradley CompactLogix PLC Control and the Allen Bradley RSLogix programming suite using the PIDE (Proportional-Integral-Derivative Enhanced) Function Block.
  • Parameter Description Parameter Value Units UPW Blender Flow Rate 1750 mL/min NH 4 F Conductivity 0.0183 ° C. ⁇ 1 Temperature Compensation Alpha pH Instrumentation Endress and Hauser No units Temperature Auto Temp Compensation Compensation NH 4 F PIDE Feedback Parameters PID Equation Type Independent Control Action Reverse Acting SP-PV No units Loop Update Time 100 Milliseconds Deadband 0.0 K p 0.4 unitless K i 3.6 minutes ⁇ 1 K d 0.007 minutes HF PIDE Feedback Parameters PID Equation Type Independent Control Action Direct Acting PV-SP No units Loop Update Time 100 milliseconds Deadband 0.0 K p 20 unitless K i 80.0 minutes ⁇ 1 K d 0.4 minutes
  • the second HF rich source 300 was designed to challenge the system in comparison to the neutral free species source 300 supply #1 and for the system to throttle back the amount of HF delivered to the blend via source 200 and maintain the same final blend as more HF is delivered via source 300 supply #2.
  • the concentrations of the first source 300 supply #1 will be considered the desired concentration.
  • the system maintained the concentration of HF within +0.0020% w/w and NH 4 F within ⁇ 0.0149% w/w in the final product notwithstanding the change of NH 4 F source 300 .
  • These results are well within the claimed concentration limits.
  • Using the targeted temperature compensated pH and conductivity a final product assay with small variations was achieved.
  • these results were obtained on small volume samples, and do not benefit from the long term averaging that continuous dynamic blending provides.
  • a much tighter control on the variation of the targeted pH and conductivity is expected. The tighter control on these critical control parameters will lead to a much tighter control on the final product assay notwithstanding variations in the feed product assay.
  • Blendpoint 250 was reproduced in a large beaker with dilute HF to a conductivity of 50 mS/cm as measured by the same external conductivity probe as in the example above, a Mettler Toledo InLab 717 Conductivity Probe. The sample was split into two small beakers. In one beaker, source 300 supply #1 was added to a conductivity of 50 mS/cm and in the other beaker, source 300 supply #2 was added to a conductivity of 50 mS/cm; this is the series operation of the prior art blender with conductivity feedback.
  • the two beakers were then titrated with the same Mettler Toledo Excellence T70 Titrator as in the example above to obtain the HF assay.
  • the conductivity and pH were measured with the Mettler Toledo InLab 717 Conductivity Probe and the Mettler Toledo DG111-SC pH Probe in the same way as was done in the example above.
  • the HF assay alone is more than 10 times larger than the claimed target concentration window (i.e., ⁇ 0.008% w/w).
  • the two exemplary blend output tables confirm the essence of the disclosed invention; that the Deterministic Blender can compensate for changes to NH 4 F source 300 , where the prior art is blind and unable to adjust to the changing source 300 levels of free HF.
  • Neither of these examples take advantage of the inherent benefits of dynamic blending, which generally leads to a tighter control on the targeted final blend control characteristics i.e., pH and conductivity.
  • the disclosed processes simply provide a means of having the correct target for the conductivity and pH without concern for the feed assay.

Landscapes

  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Automation & Control Theory (AREA)
  • Accessories For Mixers (AREA)

Abstract

Methods and systems for high precision, continuous blending of mixtures, and particularly mixtures having at least two distinct chemical components, are disclosed. More particularly, the disclosed methods and systems provide high precision, continuous blending of buffered oxide etch mixtures containing water, ammonium fluoride, and hydrofluoric acid.

Description

    TECHNICAL FIELD
  • Methods and systems for high precision, continuous blending of mixtures, and particularly mixtures having at least two distinct chemical compounds, are disclosed. More particularly, the disclosed methods and systems provide high precision, inline blending of, among others, buffered oxide etch mixtures containing water, ammonium fluoride, and hydrofluoric acid.
    • BACKGROUND
  • In various industries, chemical delivery systems are used to supply chemicals to processing tools. Illustrative industries include the semiconductor, pharmaceutical, biomedical, food processing, household product, personal care product, or petroleum industries.
  • The chemicals being delivered by a given chemical delivery system depend, of course, on the particular processes being performed. Accordingly, the particular chemicals supplied to a semiconductor processing tool depend upon the processes being performed inside the tool. Illustrative semiconductor processes include etching, cleaning, chemical mechanical polishing (CMP), and wet deposition (e.g., spin-on, copper electroless, electroplating, etc.).
  • Commonly, two or more fluids are combined to form the desired mixture for the particular process. The mixtures may be prepared in batches, on- or off-site, and then shipped to the processing location. Alternatively, the mixtures may be prepared at the point-of-use using a suitable blender system.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 6,050,283 to Air Liquide America Corp. discloses a system and method for mixing and/or diluting ultrapure fluids, such as liquid acids, for semiconductor processing.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 6,799,883 to Air Liquide America L.P. discloses a method and apparatus for continuously blending a chemical solution for use in semiconductor processing.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 6,923,568 to Celerity, Inc. discloses a method and apparatus for blending and supplying process materials, particularly ultra-high purity chemicals.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 7,344,297 to Air Liquide Electronics U.S., LP, discloses a method and apparatus for asynchronous blending and supply of chemical solutions.
  • A need remains for methods and systems for high precision, continuous blending of solutions.
    • NOTATION AND NOMENCLATURE
  • Certain abbreviations, symbols, and terms are used throughout the following description and claims, and include:
  • As used herein, the indefinite article “a” or “an” means one or more.
  • As used herein, the terms “approximately” or “about” mean±2% of the value stated.
  • As used herein, the term “inline” or “continuous” means that the blending process substantially simultaneously feeds the chemicals to while removing the product mixture from a mixing zone without interruption. The inline blending process is distinct from a “batch” process, in which defined quantities of chemicals are mixed, typically in a mixing tank, to produce a batch, or specific quantity, of the product mixture.
  • As used herein, the term “slurry” means a chemically active or buffered solution containing suspended solids. Slurries are typically used to remove and/or planarize deposited materials.
  • As used herein, the term “species” means atoms, molecules, molecular fragments, ions, etc. resulting from the methods disclosed. In other words, the disclosed blending methods of any of the components, fluids, acids, bases, oxidizers, reducers, or chemicals disclosed herein may produce species (i.e., atoms, molecules, molecular fragments, ions, etc.) of the item subject to blending.
  • As used herein, the phrase “maintaining a target concentration in the mixture of Component X within # % w/w” means not permitting the concentration of the mixture to exceed the # % w/w difference from the target concentration.
    • SUMMARY
  • Inline blending methods are disclosed. The components that are blended may alter each other's assays, complicating the standard inline blending processes which typically mix components based on volume or mass. Component A, Component B, and a solvent are mixed in an inline blender to form a mixture. The mixture is analyzed downstream of the inline blender to determine the concentration of Component A and the concentration of Component B. A target concentration in the mixture of Component A is maintained within 0.008% w/w and a target concentration in the mixture of Component B is maintained within 0.22% w/w by adjusting the flow rate of Component A, Component B, and/or the solvent based on the concentration of Component A and the concentration of Component B. The disclosed inline blending methods may include one or more of the following aspects:
      • maintaining the target concentration notwithstanding the source of Component A and/or Component B and/or the solvent;
      • the mixture being a solution;
      • the mixture being a slurry;
      • the slurry comprising a basic solution;
      • the slurry comprising an acidic solution;
      • the slurry comprising abrasive particles;
      • the abrasive particles being silica (SiO2), alumina (Al2O3), calcium carbonate (CaCO3), ceria (CeO2), zirconia (ZrO2), or titania (TiO2);
      • the solvent being ultra pure water;
      • the inline blender being a static mixer;
      • the inline blender being a stirrer;
      • the inline blender being a vortex element;
      • the inline blender being a combination of a static mixer and a vortex element;
      • downstream of the inline blender being a tube or pipe having an unrestricted flow path;
      • downstream of the inline blender not being a mixing or holding tank;
      • wherein Component A, Component B, and the solvent are mixed together in one inline blender to form the mixture;
      • wherein Component A, Component B, the solvent, and the abrasive particles are mixed together in one inline blender to form the mixture;
      • maintaining the target concentration of Component A within 0.001% w/w;
      • maintaining the target concentration of Component B within 0.001% w/w;
      • Component A comprising species that affect the concentration of Component B;
      • Component B comprising species that affect the concentration of Component A;
      • the flow rate of Component A, Component B, and/or the solvent being adjusted using a PID algorithm;
      • Component A being HF and Component B being NH4F;
      • Component A being a slurry and Component B being H2O2
      • Component A being NH4OH and Component B being H2O2;
      • Component A being HCl and Component B being H2O2;
      • Component A being H2SO4 and Component B being H2O2;
      • Component A being NH4OH and Component B being ammonium acetate;
      • Component A being NaHCO3 and Component B being NaOH;
      • analyzing the concentration of Component A using a different analyzer than that used to measure the concentration of Component B;
      • the concentration of Component A and the concentration of Component B being monitored by a combination of a conductivity meter, a pH meter, a refractometer, a turbidity monitor, a Raman spectrometer, an infrared spectrometer, a UV/VIS spectrometer, a densitometer, an ultra-sonic meter, and a particle counter;
      • the concentration of HF being determined using a pH meter;
      • the concentration of the slurry being determined by a densitometer;
      • the concentration of H2O2 being determined by a refractometer;
      • the concentration of HCl being determined using a pH meter;
      • the concentration of HF being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of HCl being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of H2SO4 being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of NH4F being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of NH4OH being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of H2O2 being determined using a refractometer;
      • adjusting the flow rate of Component A using a PID algorithm;
      • adjusting the flow rate of Component B using a PID algorithm;
      • the flow rate of HF being adjusted using a direct acting PID algorithm; and
      • the flow rate of NH4F being adjusting using a reverse acting PID algorithm.
  • Methods of mixing chemical fluids in an inline blender to produce a mixture having a concentration of the chemical fluids within 0.22% w/w of a target concentration are also disclosed. A first chemical fluid is introduced into an inline blender via a first flow control device. A second chemical fluid is introduced into the inline blender via a second flow control device. A third chemical fluid is introduced into the inline blender via a third flow control device. The first chemical fluid, the second chemical fluid, and the third chemical fluid are mixed in a mixing zone of the inline blender to form a mixture. The mixture is monitored downstream from the mixing zone for a first chemical fluid concentration and a second chemical fluid concentration. The first flow control device is adjusted based on the first chemical fluid concentration. The second flow control device is adjusted based on the second chemical fluid concentration. The disclosed methods may include one or more of the following aspects:
      • maintaining the target concentration notwithstanding the source of the first chemical fluid and/or the second chemical fluid and/or the third chemical fluid;
      • the first flow control device, the second flow control device, and the third flow control device being an orifice, a flow control valve, a stepper throttle, or combinations thereof;
      • the mixing zone being a tube or a pipe having an unrestricted flow path;
      • the mixing zone comprising an element to induce mixing;
      • the element to induce mixing being a static mixer, a stirrer, a vortex element, or combinations thereof;
      • downstream of the inline blender being a tube or pipe having an unrestricted flow path;
      • downstream of the inline blender not being a mixing or holding tank;
      • the mixture being a solution;
      • the mixture being a slurry;
      • the slurry comprising a basic solution;
      • the slurry comprising an acidic solution;
      • the slurry comprising abrasive particles;
      • the abrasive particles being silica (SiO2), alumina (Al2O3), calcium carbonate (CaCO3), ceria (CeO2), zirconia (ZrO2), or titania (TiO2);
      • wherein the first chemical fluid, the second chemical fluid, and the third chemical fluid are mixed together in one mixing zone of the inline blender to form the mixture;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the first chemical fluid within 0.008% w/w;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the second chemical fluid within 0.22% w/w;
      • the first chemical fluid and the second chemical fluid not being water;
      • the first chemical fluid being H2SO4, HF, NH4OH, or HCl;
      • the second chemical fluid being H2O2 or NH4F;
      • the third chemical fluid being water;
      • the first chemical fluid being HF and the second chemical fluid being NH4F;
      • the first chemical fluid being NH4OH and the second chemical fluid being H2O2;
      • the first chemical fluid being HCl and the second chemical fluid being H2O2;
      • the first chemical fluid being H2SO4 and the second chemical fluid being H2O2;
      • the first chemical fluid being NH4OH and the second chemical fluid being ammonium acetate;
      • the first chemical fluid being NaHCO3 and the second chemical fluid being NaOH;
      • the first chemical fluid comprising ions that affect the second chemical fluid concentration;
      • the second chemical fluid comprising ions that affect the first chemical fluid concentration;
      • the ions being selected from H+, NH4 +, SO4 2−, F−, OH−, or Cl−;
      • the ions being selected from H+, NH4 +, H−, OH−, OOH−, O2 −, or F−;
      • analyzing the concentration of the first chemical fluid using a different analyzer than that used to measure the concentration of second chemical fluid;
      • the first chemical fluid concentration and the second chemical fluid concentration being monitored by a combination of a conductivity meter, a pH meter, a refractometer, a turbidity monitor, a Raman spectrometer, an infrared spectrometer, a UV/VIS spectrometer, a densitometer, an ultra-sonic meter and a particle counter;
      • the first chemical fluid concentration being monitored by a temperature-adjusted conductivity meter;
      • the second chemical fluid concentration being monitored by a temperature-adjusted pH meter;
      • the concentration of HF being determined using a pH meter;
      • the concentration of slurry being determined by a densitometer;
      • the concentration of H2O2 being determined by a refractometer;
      • the concentration of HCl being determined using a pH meter;
      • the concentration of HF being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of HCl being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of H2SO4 being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of NH4F being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the concentration of NH4OH being determined using a conductivity meter;
      • the flow rate of H2O2 being adjusted using a refractometer;
      • adjusting the flow rate of the first chemical fluid using a PID algorithm;
      • adjusting the flow rate of second chemical fluid using a PID algorithm;
      • the flow rate of HF being adjusted using a direct acting PID algorithm; and
      • the flow rate of NH4F being adjusting using a reverse acting PID algorithm.
  • Methods of mixing acids and bases in an inline blender to produce mixtures having consistent concentrations are also disclosed. A solvent is introduced into an inline blender via a first flow control device. An acid is introduced into the inline blender via a second flow control device. A base is introduced into the inline blender via a third flow control device. The acid, base, and solvent are mixed in a mixing zone of the inline blender to form a mixture. The mixture is monitored downstream from the mixing zone for an acid concentration and a base concentration. The second flow control device is adjusted based on the acid concentration. The third flow control device is adjusted based on the base concentration. The disclosed methods include one or more of the following aspects:
      • maintaining the acid concentration and the base concentration notwithstanding the source of the acid and/or the base;
      • the first flow control device, the second flow control device, and the third flow control device being an orifice, a flow control valve, a stepper throttle, or combinations thereof;
      • wherein the acid, base, and solvent are mixed together in one mixing zone of the inline blender to form the mixture;
      • the mixing zone being a tube or a pipe having an unrestricted flow path;
      • the mixing zone comprising an element to induce mixing;
      • the element to induce mixing being a static mixer, a stirrer, a vortex element, or combinations thereof;
      • downstream of the mixing zone being a tube or pipe having an unrestricted flow path;
      • downstream of the mixing zone not being a mixing or holding tank;
      • the mixture being a solution;
      • monitoring the acid concentration using a different analyzer than that used to measure the base concentration;
      • the acid concentration and base concentration being monitored by a combination of a conductivity meter, a pH meter, a refractometer, a turbidity monitor, a Raman spectrometer, an infrared spectrometer, a UV/VIS spectrometer, a densitometer, an ultra-sonic meter and a particle counter;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the acid within 0.01% w/w;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the base within 0.01% w/w;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the acid within 0.001% w/w;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the base within 0.001% w/w;
      • the solvent being water;
      • the acid and the base not being water;
      • the acid comprising ions that affect the base concentration;
      • the acid being HF;
      • the ions being selected from the group consisting of H+ and F−;
      • the base comprising ions that affect the acid concentration;
      • the base being NH4F;
      • the ions being selected from the group consisting of H+, NH4 +, H−, or F−;
      • the base concentration being monitored by a temperature-compensated conductivity meter; and
      • the acid concentration being monitored by a temperature-compensated pH meter.
  • Methods of mixing an oxidizer and a reducer in an inline blender to produce a mixture having a consistent concentration are also disclosed. A solvent is introduced into an inline blender via a first flow control device. An oxidizer is introduced into the inline blender via a second flow control device. A reducer is introduced into the inline blender via a third flow control device. The oxidizer, reducer, and solvent are mixed in a mixing zone of the inline blender to form a mixture. The mixture is monitored downstream from the mixing zone for an oxidizer concentration and a reducer concentration. The second flow control device is adjusted based on the oxidizer concentration. The third flow control device is adjusted based on the reducer concentration. The disclosed methods may include one or more of the following aspects:
      • maintaining the oxidizer concentration and the reduce concentration notwithstanding the source of oxidizer and/or the reducer;
      • the first flow control device, the second flow control device, and the third flow control device being an orifice, a flow control valve, a stepper throttle, or combinations thereof;
      • wherein the oxidizer, reducer, and solvent are mixed together in one mixing zone of the inline blender to form the mixture;
      • the mixing zone being a tube or a pipe having an unrestricted flow path;
      • the mixing zone comprising an element to induce mixing;
      • the element to induce mixing being a static mixer, a stirrer, a vortex element, or combinations thereof;
      • downstream of the mixing zone being a tube or pipe having an unrestricted flow path;
      • downstream of the mixing zone not being a mixing or holding tank;
      • the mixture being a solution;
      • monitoring the oxidizer concentration using a different analyzer than that used to measure the reducer concentration;
      • the oxidizer concentration and reducer concentration being monitored by a combination of a conductivity meter, a pH meter, a refractometer, a turbidity monitor, a Raman spectrometer, an infrared spectrometer, a UV/VIS spectrometer, a densitometer, an ultra-sonic meter and a particle counter;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the oxidizer within 0.01% w/w;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the reducer within 0.01% w/w;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the oxidizer within 0.001% w/w;
      • maintaining the target concentration of the reducer within 0.001% w/w;
      • the solvent being water;
      • the oxidizer and the reducer not being water;
      • the oxidizer comprising ions that affect the reducer concentration;
      • the oxidizer being H2O2 or NH4OH;
      • the ions being H+, NH4 +, or OH−;
      • the reducer comprising ions that affect the oxidizer concentration;
      • the reducer being H2O2, H2SO4, or HCl;
      • the ions being H+, H−, OH−, OOH−, O2−, HSO4−, SO42−, or Cl−;
      • monitoring the reducer concentration by a temperature-compensated conductivity meter; and
      • monitoring the oxidizer concentration by a temperature-compensated pH meter.
  • An inline chemical blender for mixing chemicals in real-time is also disclosed. Three chemical fluid flow control devices communicate three chemical fluids from their sources to a mixing zone of the inline chemical blender. Three sensors are located downstream of the mixing zone, one of which monitors the temperature of the mixture and two of which measure the concentrations of two of the chemical fluids in the mixture. The disclosed inline chemical blender may include one or more of the following aspects:
      • each flow control device being an orifice, flow control valve, stepper throttle, or combinations thereof;
      • the mixing zone being a tube or pipe;
      • the mixing zone being a tank or reservoir;
      • downstream of the mixing zone being a tube or pipe having an unrestricted flow path;
      • downstream of the mixing zone not being a mixing or holding tank;
      • measuring the concentration of a first chemical fluid using a different sensor than that used to measure the concentration of a second chemical fluid;
      • maintaining a concentration of the first chemical fluid in the mixture and a concentration of the second chemical fluid in the mixture notwithstanding the source of the first chemical fluid and/or the second chemical fluid;
      • the sensors being combinations of a temperature sensor, a conductivity meter, a pH meter, a refractometer, a turbidity monitor, a Raman spectrometer, an infrared spectrometer, a UV/VIS spectrometer, a densitometer, an ultra-sonic meter and a particle counter;
      • the sensors communicating with the flow control devices via a PID algorithm;
      • the PID algorithm adjusting the flow rate of a chemical fluid proportionally to the pH results of the chemical fluid;
      • the PID algorithm increasing the flow rate of a chemical fluid when the pH results of the chemical fluid increase;
      • the PID algorithm adjusting the flow rate of a chemical fluid inversely to the conductivity results of the chemical fluid;
      • the PID algorithm decreasing the flow rate of a chemical fluid when the conductivity results of the chemical fluid increase; and
      • further comprising a drain downstream of the mixing zone.
    BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
  • For a further understanding of the nature and objects of the present invention, reference should be made to the following detailed description, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like elements are given the same or analogous reference numbers and wherein:
  • FIG. 1 is a block schematic diagram of a prior art inline blender;
  • FIG. 2 is a graph showing concentration (wt. %) versus conductivity (mS/cm) of two blend points produced by the prior art inline blender of FIG. 1;
  • FIG. 3 is a block schematic diagram of an inline blender with a proposed offline chemical analysis feedforward step;
  • FIG. 4 is a block schematic diagram of the disclosed inline blender;
  • FIG. 5 is a graph showing pH versus HF concentration for different molarity NH4F solutions; and
  • FIG. 6 is the graph demonstrating how to select the pH and conductivity set points necessary to produce the blend having the desired concentration, notwithstanding the assay of the source materials.
    •  DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS
  • Inline blending multiple chemical constituents in a way that is accurate and repeatable is difficult when the chemical constituents interact with and affect each other. Even if the assay of each chemical constituent consistently remains within a specification window, the effect of compounding error may make it difficult to control the specification for the final blended product.
  • The prior art volume-based and weight-based blending processes do not address this issue, since they depend solely on the known specification of the incoming material.
  • Metrology-based feedback inline blenders use techniques such as conductivity, pH, refractive index, density, turbidity, and other measurements, in order to control the flow rate of the chemicals and maintain the final blended material specification.
  • Previous continuous inline blenders, of the type schematically represented in FIG. 1, have a series of “Blend Points” with one constituent species added at each blend point and controlled locally with a feedback metrology device, typically conductivity, but also Refractive Index, pH, Ultra Sonic, densitometers, etc. The first complication to final blend accuracy in these series of continuous inline blenders arises at the second blend point. The concentration of the first blend point is immune to the single species source assay, such as 49% HF acid, because the first series blend point with feedback provides for the correct first blend point assay even if the chemical source is 48% HF acid. The feedback from the first blend point allows more flow of the 48% HF source to compensate. However, the second blendpoint is not immune to the single species source assay, even when the second chemical source is a single species, such as NH4F having no other added species, such as HF or NH3. if the single species NH4F source assay varies from the expected 40% NH4F w/w (e.g., 39% or 41% NH4F w/w), the variance ripples upstream and alters the intended assay of the first blend point by diluting or concentrating it. In other words, the addition of the second chemical having an assay that differs from expected results in an improper concentration of the first chemical in the final solution.
  • Concentration control is further impacted when the two chemical compounds to be blended alter each other's concentrations. In other words, prior art systems use of subsequent sensors to measure the concentration of each sequentially added component fails to address the impact a subsequent component may have on the concentration of an earlier component. As a result, some solutions cannot be blended without ambiguous output based upon the prior art single component/single sensor embodiment. For example, any traces of NH3 or HF in NH4F may negatively affect the total HF concentration in a buffered oxide etch solution.
  • A term used to describe the robustness of a blender for source chemical concentrations is “Source Immunity”. This describes the level to which the final inline blend concentration target can be maintained with variations in the concentration of the input source chemicals. Single Species Source Immunity exists only at the first blend point. In other words, the final output of the blending with feedback from a conductivity signal for simple HF dilution blending is immune to the input HF concentration (i.e., 48% wt/wt, 49% wt/wt, 46% wt/wt, etc.).
  • For each subsequent series blend point (i.e., second, third, etc.), the precise source assay input must be known and constant, or concentration or dilution of the first constituent may take place and result in an out of specification assay condition for the first component at the second and/or third blend points. This type of blend error ripples upstream through the series of continuous inline blenders. The second component may be out of specification at the third and fourth blend points.
  • This continuous inline blender limitation is worsened when certain species are present in more than one of the chemical constituents being blended. For example, NH4F may include H2O, OH−, NH4F, NH3, NH4 +, HF, H+, and F−. When HF and NH4F are blended, any HF or F— present therein may alter the concentration of HF in the final blend.
  • In the semiconductor industry, due to the high purity required for the chemicals and blends containing these chemicals, gas phase generation of the chemical or blend is typical and preferable compared to simple solid phase dissolution of various salts etc. As a result, the final assay may also include free species in the gas phase due to difficulty controlling the final gas phase end point.
  • When multiple chemicals are blended, for example deionized water (DIW)+Chemical A+Chemical B, the prior art teaches that Chemical A is added at a first chemical mixing zone, controlled by a first metrology feedback, and Chemical B is added sequentially into a second chemical mixing zone, controlled by a second metrology feedback. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 6,050,283 to Air Liquide America Corp. Additional chemical additions are possible, each one added in sequence with a dedicated metrology feedback control. When the incoming source material specification changes, the blender described above is not able to detect or correct for that condition for all upstream chemicals, and the blended material may be out of specification.
  • Accurate mixing of chemicals is particularly important in at least the semiconductor industry due to the continuous shrinking of the product size necessitated by Moore's law. Failure to maintain the specified concentrations may introduce product variations or even failure. Product degradation may occur when the product is shipped from off-site or if a batch sits for too long.
  • Buffered chemical solutions using salt buffers are particularly afflicted by the limitations of the prior art continuous inline blenders. For example, many buffered oxide etch formulations will use an ammonium fluoride (i.e., NH4F) salt buffer to create a buffered hydrofluoric acid solution for etch control. The original NH4F solution is manufactured by dissolving NH3 gas into a hydrofluoric acid solution and attempting to stop the manufacturing process at the neutral point (i.e., the point at which there is no excess HF or NH3 in the solution). If the reaction is stopped too early, the final ammonium fluoride becomes HF rich and if the reaction is stopped late, the resulting ammonium fluoride would be NH3 rich. Alternatively, the entire ammonium fluoride salt buffer may be generated from the gas phase by first dissolving anhydrous HF into water to form HF acid and then dissolving NH3 gas into the HF acid to formulate the ammonium fluoride. In this case, if the reaction is stopped too early, the final ammonium fluoride becomes HF rich and if the reaction is stopped late, the resulting ammonium fluoride would be NH3 rich. As a result, the final blend assay is affected by the unknown and non-constant free species in the ammonium fluoride source material.
  • Preparation of a buffered oxide etch solution is described as follows using a typical prior art blender shown in FIG. 1 in block schematic form. In FIG. 1, Ultrapure Water, or UPW, 100 is blended with 49% w/w HF 200 at blendpoint 250 to produce dilute HF. The UPW 100 may be delivered to blendpoint 250 using a flow meter (not shown). The HF 200 may be delivered to blendpoint 250 using a proportioning valve (not shown). The proportioning valve (not shown) may deliver more or less HF 200 to the blendpoint 250 based on temperature corrected conductivity feedback 251 to achieve the desired dilute HF assay. The dilute HF produced at blendpoint 250 is at the desired concentration independent of the actual HF 200 source assay (i.e., source immunity).
  • The dilute HF produced at blendpoint 250 is then blended with ammonium fluoride 300, which may contain free NH3 or HF, at blendpoint 350 to produce the buffered oxide etch solution 400. Although depicted as a “block” in FIG. 1, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the buffered oxide etch solution 400 is delivered either directly to the processing equipment or to a drain. The ammonium fluoride 300 may be delivered to blendpoint 350 using a proportioning valve (not shown).
  • At blendpoint 350, the first general error may arise as a function of the actual ammonium fluoride assay—40.0%+/−1% NH4F by wt. If this assay is not known and held constant across all sources of ammonium fluoride 300, the HF assay in the buffered oxide etch solution 400 may be forced out of specification. In addition, the final HF concentration may be affected by the unknown and non-constant free species, NH3 or HF, existing in the gas phase production generation of ammonium fluoride source material 300. The final free HF assay in the buffered oxide etch solution 400 typically requires a very high tolerance due to the sensitive process in which the etch solution is used.
  • As a result, the buffered oxide etch solution 400 only produces acceptable HF assays for one exact and specific assay of the ammonium fluoride source material 300, for example 40.0% NH4F and 0.05% Free HF by wt. Every time a new lot of ammonium fluoride 300 is brought online or if the ammonium fluoride 300 undergoes any changes in concentration while being used, the blender set points must be changed to produce the required buffered oxide etch solution assays. The ammonium fluoride assay may be performed using titration, functional silicon wafer etch tests, or a combination of both, all of which are time consuming and time sensitive.
  • The UPW 100, HF 200, and NH4F 300 are retrieved from industry standard storage units. The storage units are in fluid communication with blendpoint 250 and 350. Blendpoint 250 and 350 are in fluid communication with a drain (not shown) and processing equipment (not shown). More particularly, supply lines supply the UPW 100, HF 200, and NH4F 300 to the blendpoints 250 and 350. Similarly, supply lines supply the resulting buffered oxide etch solution to a drain (not shown) or processing equipment (not shown). The supply lines are industry standard supply lines. The supply lines may include flow control devices, such as orifices, flow control valves, stepper throttles, or combinations thereof; valves, such as check valves or electronic valves; and/or pressure regulators.
  • Blendpoint 250 or 350 is a mixing zone, also known as an inline blender. The mixing zone may be a tube or pipe having an unrestricted flow path. Alternatively, the mixing zone may be a T junction. In either alternative, the tube or pipe may include an element to induce mixing, such as a static mixer, a stirrer, a vortex element, or combinations thereof. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the suitable mixing zone will be determined based upon both the mixing conditions required and pressure necessary at the point of use. More particularly, a viscous solution or slurry may require more forceful mixing than a flowing solution and, as a result, an element to induce mixing. However, an element to induce mixing may result in loss of pressure across the system. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize the mixing zone necessary based on equipment setup and the product to be mixed.
  • The supply line downstream of blendpoint 250 or 350 includes a sensor (not shown) that measures a characteristic of the blend. Exemplary sensors include conductivity meters, pH meters, refractometers, turbidity monitors, Raman spectrometers, infrared spectrometers, a densitometer, an ultra-sonic meter, spectrometers, and particle counters. The sensors provide real-time feedback (i.e., 251, 351) to the relevant flow control device and adjusts the flow rate based on the analysis results. For example, if the conductivity is a little high, a conductivity meter may instruct the flow control device for HF 100 to decrease the flow rate. If the conductivity is too high so that the resulting buffered oxide etch solution 400 is unusable, the sensor may instruct a valve in the line to divert the solution to the drain. The sensors and flow control devices may communicate via a controller. The communication may occur via electrical wiring or wireless communication links. The controller may include a processor that is programmable to implement any one or more suitable types of process control, such as proportional-integral-derivative (PID) feedback control. Exemplary controllers include the PLC Simatic S7-300 system from Siemens Corp. Also commonly used are Allen Bradley CompactLogix PLC Control and the Allen Bradley RSLogix programming suite.
  • Surprisingly, Applicants have found that neither the refractometer nor the conductivity meter were capable of determining the concentration of free species in the resulting buffered oxide etch solution. However, pH analysis properly reflects free species in the solution.
  • FIG. 2 is a graph that illustrates the resulting two blend point operating curve that demonstrates the inadequacy of the prior art inline blender of FIG. 1. The graph shows the conductivity (in mS/cm) versus concentration (in wt. %) of two blend points: 250 and 350. Point 250 provides the concentration and conductivity of the solution at blendpoint 250 in FIG. 1, more particularly, 0.08% w/w HF and 3.300 mS/cm. Point 350 provides the concentration and conductivity of the solution from blendpoint 350 in FIG. 1, more particularly, 14.8% w/w NH4F and 160 mS/cm. The operating curve shown in FIG. 2 is only valid for one unique ammonium fluoride source 300 assay. To obtain the buffered HF 400 having 14.8% wt. NH4F and 0.08% wt. HF from a HF 200 source and an ammonium fluoride source 300 of 40% NH4F by wt. and 0.000% free species, the blendpoint 250 is set to 3.300 mS/cm and the HF is added from source HF 200 until a conductivity of 3.300 mS/cm is reached at blendpoint 250. NH4F is then added from source NH4F 300 at blendpoint 350 to a conductivity of 160 mS/cm. If the ammonium fluoride source 300 changes, the 3.300 mS/cm setting at blendpoint 250 will no longer be valid to obtain the final required buffered HF 400 solution. A unique blendpoint 250 must be found for every ammonium fluoride source 300 assay as explained above.
  • Various techniques were tested to try to minimize or remove this ammonium fluoride assay dependence, including reversing the blend order to blend ammonium fluoride first followed by HF, all unsuccessfully, because there is no method of compensating for the varying assays of the NH4F source material using the blender arrangement of FIG. 1.
  • Based on the limitations of the prior art continuous inline blender of FIG. 1, a “Feedforward” step was proposed that includes the assay of the ammonium fluoride 300 and the amount of free species NH3 or HF to alter the setpoint for HF source at the blendpoint 250 analysis. A block schematic of this proposal is shown in FIG. 3. An automated means (not shown) provides the concentration of free species and ammonium fluoride in the ammonium fluoride source 300 to blendpoint 250 as indicated by the feedforward step 352. The automated means must remain accurate for the NH4F assay as well as free species NH3 or HF across a full domain of source 300 input possibilities, pH for example, vs. just one single value—the final disclosed blender setpoint. Based on mass balance information and calculations, the new setpoint 352 was sent to the blendpoint 250. Various automated metrology devices were explored to provide this automated solution, including conductivity, refractive index and pH. Due to mass balance offsets, convoluted intermediate steps with errors, and difficulty obtaining the true assay of the ammonium fluoride 300, not to mention the long time interval, consumables and equipment costs necessary to run such an automated analytical assay process, this proposal was rejected. Blendpoint 350 of FIGS. 2 and 3 must remain fixed because the final buffered oxide etch solution 400 assay must be fixed.
  • FIG. 4 is a block schematic of the inline blender that solves the problems that have not been resolved in the prior art. As will be described in more detail below, blendpoint 250 of FIGS. 1 and 3 has been eliminated and blendpoint 350 now provides temperature compensated pH feedback 251 to the proportioning valve (not shown) for HF 200 and temperature compensated conductivity feedback 351 to the proportioning valve (not shown) for the ammonium fluoride source 300.
  • Chemical equilibrium arises within a buffering salt and acid. As discussed above for the buffered oxide etch solution, using NH4F as the salt buffer results in the following chemical solution species:
      • H2O (I)
      • HF (aq)
      • H+
      • OH−
      • NH4 +
      • NH3
      • F−
        In FIG. 4, the NH4F salt is fully dissolved in the aqueous solution at NH4F source 300. The pH feedback 251 and conductivity feedback 351 must take place after complete mixing of UPW 100, HF 200, and NH4F 300 (i.e., completion of any chemical reaction, salt formation from NH3 rich material, etc.) and establishment of a full chemical equilibrium for all the ion species.
  • At chemical equilibrium, an Initial, Change, Equilibrium (“ICE”) matrix for the components to be reacted may be established to determine the sensor settings needed. Alternatively, for many cases, the shortcut Henderson-Haselbalch equation may be used (i.e., pH=pKa+log10 ([A−]/[HA]), wherein Ka is the acid dissociation constant, [HA] is the molar concentration of the un-dissociated weak acid, and [A−] is the molar concentration of the conjugate base of HA). One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the ICE matrix or Henderson-Haselbach equations are temperature dependent.
  • The resulting chemical operating curve is shown in FIG. 5, which is a graph showing pH of the blend versus HF molar concentration for different molarity NH4F solutions. The FIG. 5 graph shows a family of curves representing the molarity of the salt buffer NH4F. 10 curves are shown for NH4F molarity ranging from 0.5 M to 5.0 M. The molarity of the NH4F buffer solution provides the desired conductivity reading. For example, the solid line represents 0.5 M NH4F; the dotted line represents 1.0 M NH4F; the triangled line represents 1.5 M NH4F; the squared line represents 2.0 M NH4F; the dot-dash line represents 2.5 M NH4F; the dashed line represents 3.0 M NH4F; the dot-dot-dash line represents 3.5 M NH4F; the circled line represents 4.0 M NH4F; the
    Figure US20160296902A1-20161013-P00001
    line represents 4.5 M NH4F; and the diamond line represents 5.0 M NH4F. Data of concentration versus conductivity for various chemicals are published at 25° C. For each molarity of NH4F above, a specific temperature compensated conductivity is manifested. For highest accuracy in the disclosed blender, the actual temperature compensated conductivity at each salt buffer concentration is determined empirically.
  • Each NH4F molarity curve intersects the pH and HF concentration axes at different points. As shown by the solid graph grid line at pH=4.5, a constant pH may be maintained with increasing HF concentration due to the buffering effect obtained by the increasing NH4F M. The desired concentration of the oxide etch buffer solution may be selected to determine the needed molarity/conductivity of the NH4F and pH of the resulting oxide etch buffer solution. For example, as shown in FIG. 6, if the desired blend contains 14.8% NH4F by wt. (4.00 M or 160.00 mS/cm) and 0.08000% HF by wt (0.04 M), the resulting pH is 5.1. The resulting setpoints for the blender sensors using this example are:
      • Temperature Compensated Conductivity 351=160.00 mS/cm
      • Temperature Compensated pH 251=5.1
  • Instead of a cascaded series of inline blend points used by the traditional continuous blender, just one blend point 350 may be used as the confluence of all the constituents, and feedback is established to obtain the setpoints from the operating curve shown in FIG. 5. As a result, the blender occupies a smaller footprint than the prior art multi-blend point inline blender and further may require less maintenance.
  • Experimentation in a full scale blender has demonstrated that using conventional proportional-integral-derivative (PID) feedback control, final blend output assay control is automatically, (via the disclosed PID feedback control), obtained/maintained, regardless of HF or NH4F source assays. The conventional PID feedback control system is an electronic closed-loop control between the flow meters, control valves (or pump control), and analyzers. The analyzer results are used to adjust the flow meters and/or control valves in order to maintain the final desired blend assay.
  • The NH4F Molarity/Concentration is automatically controlled with a “Reverse Acting”, (SP-PV), traditional PID algorithm—as conductivity rises, NH4F flow drops via the PID algorithm.
  • The HF Molarity/Concentration is automatically controlled with a “Direct Acting”, (PV-SP), traditional PID algorithm—as pH rises, HF flow increases via PID algorithm.
  • These two automatic PID feedback algorithms ensure the final blend output is at the temperature compensated conductivity and temperature compensated pH and therefore at the unique and required blend output assay.
  • When a new NH4F source is placed online, regardless of the NH4F assay or the amount of free NH3 or HF, final blend assay is controlled by automatically via the PID feedback as explained above to maintain the desired conductivity and pH and thus the final stable and consistent NH4F and HF assay. The final blend does not change as a function of the origin of the free HF species—either in the HF source or the NH4F source as long as the six species alone are present, mixing is complete, chemical equilibrium is established, and process variables are temperature compensated as discussed previously. Nor does the bulk concentration of salt in the source NH4F effect the final blend assay, but instead simply by the flow of NH4F driven from the Reverse Acting PID algorithm.
  • The resulting solutions/slurries having the desired concentration may be prepared on-demand without worrying about any changes to the concentrations of the starting materials. More particularly, the disclosed methods produce solutions and slurries on demand that are able to maintain concentrations within 0.22% w/w of the desired concentration. Depending on the chemical and measuring technique, the concentration may be maintained within 0.008% w/w of the desired goal. As shown in the examples that follow, this is an improvement over the results obtained using the prior art blender of FIG. 1.
  • While tests to date have been performed using the buffered oxide etch solution (i.e., NH4F/HF/H2O), Applicants believe that the disclosed blending process may also be used for other solutions requiring high precision that are common in the electronics industry including, but not limited to, solutions such as NH4OH/H2O2/H2O, HCl/H2O2/H2O, or H2SO4/H2O2/H2O or slurries containing abrasive particles, such as silica (SiO2), alumina (Al2O3), calcium carbonate (CaCO3), ceria (CeO2), zirconia (ZrO2), or titania (TiO2) in a basic solution such as NH4OH/ammonium acetate/H2O or NaHCO3/NaOH/H2O or an acidic solution such as NH4F/HF/H2O.
    • EXAMPLES
  • The following non-limiting examples are provided to further illustrate embodiments of the invention. However, the examples are not intended to be all inclusive and are not intended to limit the scope of the inventions described herein.
    • Disclosed Blender Example
  • The inline blender of FIG. 4 was built in the research laboratory to determine whether the final concentration was maintained after changing NH4F source 300. Due to the research settings and waste management requirements, the concentrations in these examples are less than typically encountered in the industry.
  • The trial runs were performed with an Ultra Pure Water (UPW) flow rate of 1.75 liters per minute (Lpm) flowing from UPW source 100. A pH probe and conductivity probe for feedback elements 251 and 351 was added after blendpoint 350. A PTFE six stage static mixer purchased from Edlon Inc. was used for blendpoint 350.
  • Each Feedback Metrology Subsystem was tuned and optimized for this UPW flow rate for maximum stability/response. This was accomplished using the resident onboard Allen Bradley CompactLogix PLC Control and the Allen Bradley RSLogix programming suite using the PIDE (Proportional-Integral-Derivative Enhanced) Function Block.
  • The AutoTune feature of the PIDE Function Block was used to tune the PID parameters for optimum operation at the setpoints of Conductivity=50.00 mS/cm, pH=5.50. These AutoTune deduced PID parameters were rounded off and used for the Deterministic Blend Runs.
  • The following parameters were set:
  • Parameter Description Parameter Value Units
    UPW Blender Flow Rate 1750 mL/min
    NH4F Conductivity 0.0183 ° C.−1
    Temperature
    Compensation Alpha
    pH Instrumentation Endress and Hauser No units
    Temperature Auto Temp
    Compensation Compensation
    NH4F PIDE Feedback
    Parameters
    PID Equation Type Independent
    Control Action Reverse Acting SP-PV No units
    Loop Update Time 100 Milliseconds
    Deadband 0.0
    Kp 0.4 unitless
    Ki 3.6 minutes−1
    Kd 0.007 minutes
    HF PIDE Feedback
    Parameters
    PID Equation Type Independent
    Control Action Direct Acting PV-SP No units
    Loop Update Time 100 milliseconds
    Deadband 0.0
    Kp 20 unitless
    Ki 80.0 minutes−1
    Kd 0.4 minutes
  • To prepare for the experimental runs of the disclosed blender, three source containers of chemical were prepared:
      • 1. Source 200 was 49% HF
      • 2. Source 300 supply #1 contained 40% NH4F w/w and neutral free species, i.e. no free NH3 or HF
      • 3. Source 300 supply #2 contained 40% NH4F w/w and 0.9% free HF w/w
  • The second HF rich source 300 was designed to challenge the system in comparison to the neutral free species source 300 supply #1 and for the system to throttle back the amount of HF delivered to the blend via source 200 and maintain the same final blend as more HF is delivered via source 300 supply #2. As a result, the concentrations of the first source 300 supply #1 will be considered the desired concentration.
  • At the end of this full scale blender test cycle, samples of the blender output were collected and retained and titrated for HF and NH4F assay with a Mettler Toledo Excellence T70 Titrator. External measurements of the conductivity and the pH were also measured in a beaker using:
      • Mettler Toledo InLab 717 Conductivity Probe
      • Calibrated with a 12.9 mS/cm conductivity standard.
      • Mettler Toledo DG111-SC pH Probe
      • Calibrated using 5.00 and 8.00 pH standards.
  • The results of the two output blends from the disclosed blender FIG. 4 are shown in the table below: Both disclosed Deterministic Blend samples blended with source 200 HF 49% w/w.
  • External
    Measured External NH4F
    Sample Conductivity Measured HF Assay Assay
    Description (mS/cm) pH (% w/w) (% w/w)
    Source 300 50.7494 5.278 0.1655 2.7030
    Supply #1
    40% NH4F w/w
    0.00% free HF w/w
    0.00% free NH3
    Source 300 50.8206 5.247 0.1675 2.6881
    Supply #2
    40% NH4F w/w
    0.90% free HF w/w
    0.00% free NH3F
    Assay change +0.0020 −0.0149
    (% w/w)
    Accuracy = % Assay 1.2% 0.56%
    composition change =
    (Assay change/
    initial result) × 100
  • As can be seen, the system maintained the concentration of HF within +0.0020% w/w and NH4F within −0.0149% w/w in the final product notwithstanding the change of NH4F source 300. These results are well within the claimed concentration limits. Using the targeted temperature compensated pH and conductivity, a final product assay with small variations was achieved. In addition, these results were obtained on small volume samples, and do not benefit from the long term averaging that continuous dynamic blending provides. As a result, when implemented into a single blend point configuration and using two control loops for the different feeds, a much tighter control on the variation of the targeted pH and conductivity is expected. The tighter control on these critical control parameters will lead to a much tighter control on the final product assay notwithstanding variations in the feed product assay.
    • Prior Art Example
  • In order to contrast the blend output result from the prior art blender of FIG. 1, a series blender with two blend points with conductivity feedback as in FIG. 2 was simulated. Blendpoint 250 was reproduced in a large beaker with dilute HF to a conductivity of 50 mS/cm as measured by the same external conductivity probe as in the example above, a Mettler Toledo InLab 717 Conductivity Probe. The sample was split into two small beakers. In one beaker, source 300 supply #1 was added to a conductivity of 50 mS/cm and in the other beaker, source 300 supply #2 was added to a conductivity of 50 mS/cm; this is the series operation of the prior art blender with conductivity feedback. The two beakers were then titrated with the same Mettler Toledo Excellence T70 Titrator as in the example above to obtain the HF assay. The conductivity and pH were measured with the Mettler Toledo InLab 717 Conductivity Probe and the Mettler Toledo DG111-SC pH Probe in the same way as was done in the example above.
  • The results of the two output blends from the prior art blender simulation of FIG. 1 are shown in the table below:
  • External
    Measured External NH4F
    Sample Conductivity Measured HF Assay Assay
    Description (mS/cm) pH (% w/w) (% w/w)
    Source 300 49.436 4.908 0.1751 Not
    Supply #1 measured
    40% NH4F w/w
    0.00% free HF w/w
    0.00% free NH3
    Source 300 49.256 4.795 0.2661 Not
    Supply #2 measured
    40% NH4F w/w
    0.90% free HF w/w
    0.00% free NH3F
    Assay change +0.0910 N/A
    (% w/w)
    Accuracy = % Assay +51.97% N/A
    composition change
  • As can be seen, the HF assay alone is more than 10 times larger than the claimed target concentration window (i.e., ±0.008% w/w). As a result, the two exemplary blend output tables confirm the essence of the disclosed invention; that the Deterministic Blender can compensate for changes to NH4F source 300, where the prior art is blind and unable to adjust to the changing source 300 levels of free HF. Neither of these examples take advantage of the inherent benefits of dynamic blending, which generally leads to a tighter control on the targeted final blend control characteristics i.e., pH and conductivity. The disclosed processes simply provide a means of having the correct target for the conductivity and pH without concern for the feed assay.
  • It will be understood that many additional changes in the details, materials, steps, and arrangement of parts, which have been herein described and illustrated in order to explain the nature of the invention, may be made by those skilled in the art within the principle and scope of the invention as expressed in the appended claims. Thus, the present invention is not intended to be limited to the specific embodiments in the examples given above and/or the attached drawings.

Claims (20)

We claim:
1. An inline blending method of components that alter each other's assays, the method comprising:
a. mixing Component A, Component B, and a solvent in an inline blender to form a mixture;
b. analyzing the mixture downstream of the inline blender to determine a concentration of Component A and a concentration of Component B;
c. maintaining a target concentration in the mixture of Component A within 0.008% w/w and maintaining a target concentration in the mixture of Component B within 0.22% w/w by adjusting a flow rate of Component A, Component B, and/or the solvent based on the concentration of Component A and the concentration of Component B.
2. The inline blending method of claim 1, wherein the solvent is ultra purified water.
3. The inline blending method of claim 2, wherein Component A comprises species that affect the concentration of Component B.
4. The inline blending method of claim 2, wherein Component B comprises species that affect the concentration of Component A.
5. The inline blending method of claim 4, wherein Component A is HF and Component B is NH4F.
6. The inline blending method of claim 2, wherein Component A is NH4OH and Component B is H2O2.
7. The inline blending method of claim 2, wherein Component A is HCl and Component B is H2O2.
8. The inline blending method of claim 2, wherein Component A is H2SO4 and Component B is H2O2.
9. A method of mixing chemical fluids in an inline blender to produce a mixture having a concentration of the chemical fluids within 0.22% w/w of a target concentration, the method comprising:
a. introducing a first chemical fluid into an inline blender via a first flow control device;
b. introducing a second chemical fluid into the inline blender via a second flow control device;
c. introducing a third chemical fluid into the inline blender via a third flow control device;
d. mixing the first chemical fluid, the second chemical fluid, and the third chemical fluid in a mixing zone of the inline blender to form a mixture;
e. monitoring the mixture downstream from the mixing zone for a first chemical fluid concentration and a second chemical fluid concentration;
f. adjusting the first flow control device based on the first chemical fluid concentration; and
g. adjusting the second flow control device based on the second chemical fluid concentration.
10. The method of claim 9, wherein the first flow control device, the second flow control device, and the third flow control device is an orifice, a flow control valve, a stepper throttle, or combinations thereof.
11. The method of claim 9, wherein the mixing zone is a tube or a pipe having an unrestricted flow path.
12. The method of claim 9, wherein the mixing zone comprises an element to induce mixing.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein the element to induce mixing is a static mixer, a stirrer, a vortex element, or combinations thereof.
14. The method of claim 9, wherein the first chemical fluid concentration and the second chemical fluid concentration are monitored by combinations of a conductivity meter, a pH meter, a refractometer, a turbidity monitor, a Raman spectrometer, an infrared spectrometer, a UV/VIS spectrometer, a densitometer, an ultra-sonic meter, and a particle counter.
15. The method of claim 9, wherein the first chemical fluid and the second chemical fluid are not water.
16. The method of claim 9, wherein the first chemical fluid is H2SO4, HF, NH4OH, or HCl.
17. The method of claim 9, wherein the second chemical fluid is H2O2 or NH4F.
18. The method of claim 1, wherein the third chemical fluid is water.
19. The method of claim 9, wherein the first chemical fluid comprises ions that affect the second chemical fluid concentration.
20. The method of claim 9, wherein the second chemical fluid comprises ions that affect the first chemical fluid concentration.
US15/185,658 2016-06-17 2016-06-17 Deterministic feedback blender Abandoned US20160296902A1 (en)

Priority Applications (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US15/185,658 US20160296902A1 (en) 2016-06-17 2016-06-17 Deterministic feedback blender
US16/293,981 US10739795B2 (en) 2016-06-17 2019-03-06 Deterministic feedback blender

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US15/185,658 US20160296902A1 (en) 2016-06-17 2016-06-17 Deterministic feedback blender

Related Child Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US16/293,981 Continuation US10739795B2 (en) 2016-06-17 2019-03-06 Deterministic feedback blender

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
US20160296902A1 true US20160296902A1 (en) 2016-10-13

Family

ID=57111242

Family Applications (2)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US15/185,658 Abandoned US20160296902A1 (en) 2016-06-17 2016-06-17 Deterministic feedback blender
US16/293,981 Active US10739795B2 (en) 2016-06-17 2019-03-06 Deterministic feedback blender

Family Applications After (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US16/293,981 Active US10739795B2 (en) 2016-06-17 2019-03-06 Deterministic feedback blender

Country Status (1)

Country Link
US (2) US20160296902A1 (en)

Cited By (3)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US10739795B2 (en) * 2016-06-17 2020-08-11 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Deterministic feedback blender
WO2021108739A1 (en) 2019-11-27 2021-06-03 Diversified Fluid Solutions, Llc On-demand in-line-blending and supply of chemicals
WO2024026993A1 (en) * 2022-08-05 2024-02-08 福建省龙氟新材料有限公司 Automatic batching control system for ammonium fluoride preparation and control method thereof

Families Citing this family (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
PL4179402T3 (en) * 2020-08-27 2025-06-09 Signode Industrial Group Llc System and method for applying a wax coating to a workpiece during a strap-manufacturing process

Family Cites Families (114)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US1522120A (en) 1924-04-15 1925-01-06 Fred W Halder Hot and cold water mixer
US2152956A (en) 1937-01-07 1939-04-04 Etzkorn Rudolf Mixing system
US2513562A (en) 1942-06-06 1950-07-04 Colgate Palmolive Peet Co Method and apparatus for thermally regulating gravimetric flow of liquids
US2673785A (en) 1951-04-23 1954-03-30 Du Pont Removing carbon bisulfide from viscose fiber with a liquid seal vacuum pump
US2979066A (en) 1956-09-17 1961-04-11 Proctor Silex Corp Color control of liquids
US3109631A (en) 1961-04-03 1963-11-05 Continental Elektro Ind Ag Device for mixing fluids flowing through conduits
US3248233A (en) 1964-06-02 1966-04-26 Coca Cola Co Essence recovery
US3366061A (en) 1965-07-09 1968-01-30 Nash Engineering Co Device for pumping liquid and gas
US3315879A (en) 1966-04-22 1967-04-25 Irving C Jennings Evacuation system
US3402729A (en) 1967-08-04 1968-09-24 Texaco Inc Consistometer
FR1555966A (en) 1968-02-12 1969-01-31
US3642384A (en) 1969-11-19 1972-02-15 Henry Huse Multistage vacuum pumping system
DE2242626B2 (en) 1972-08-30 1977-06-23 Bayer Ag, 5090 Leverkusen PROCESS FOR EVAPORATING PHOSGENIC SOLUTIONS
US3897935A (en) 1972-11-13 1975-08-05 Eastman Kodak Co Apparatus for the preparation of a photographic emulsion
US3877682A (en) 1974-03-08 1975-04-15 Mosstype Corp Automatic chemical measuring and mixing machine
US4132585A (en) 1975-09-17 1979-01-02 Oxford Keith E Method of automatically monitoring and regenerating an etchant
US4251627A (en) 1978-05-30 1981-02-17 E. I. Du Pont De Nemours And Company Jet mixing in preparation of monodisperse silver halide emulsions
US4388864A (en) 1978-12-11 1983-06-21 Warner "Autolitho" Corporation Lithographic dampening system
US4299501A (en) 1979-08-10 1981-11-10 Ortho Pharmaceutical Corporation Continuous process for the preparation of semisolid dispersions
US4315717A (en) 1979-11-19 1982-02-16 The Nash Engineering Company Evacuation system with precondenser
US4359313A (en) 1980-03-10 1982-11-16 The Nash Engineering Company Liquid ring pump seal liquid chiller system
JPS5767938A (en) 1980-10-16 1982-04-24 Canon Inc Production of photoconductive member
JPS57200695A (en) 1981-06-02 1982-12-08 Sumitomo Metal Ind Ltd Sealing liquid feeding method for nash hytor pump
US4398996A (en) 1981-06-19 1983-08-16 Albany International Corp. Vacuum control system and method for dewatering fabrics
US4403866A (en) 1982-05-07 1983-09-13 E. I. Du Pont De Nemours And Company Process for making paints
DE3219680A1 (en) 1982-05-21 1983-11-24 Siemens AG, 1000 Berlin und 8000 München HEAT PUMP SYSTEM
US4971660A (en) 1983-10-07 1990-11-20 Rivers Jr Jacob B Method for dynamically refining and deodorizing fats and oils by distillation
JPS60161724A (en) 1984-02-01 1985-08-23 Toshiba Corp Mixing control apparatus
DE3420144A1 (en) 1984-05-30 1985-12-05 Loewe Pumpenfabrik GmbH, 2120 Lüneburg CONTROL AND CONTROL SYSTEM, IN PARTICULAR. FOR WATERING VACUUM PUMPS
CN1005642B (en) 1984-12-07 1989-11-01 西门子公司 vacuum equipment
GB8521968D0 (en) 1985-09-04 1985-10-09 British Petroleum Co Plc Preparation of emulsions
US4823987A (en) 1986-04-28 1989-04-25 Ryco Graphic Manufacturing, Inc. Liquid mixing system and method
US5372421A (en) 1986-06-05 1994-12-13 Pardikes; Dennis Method of inverting, mixing, and activating polymers
US4712921A (en) 1986-10-24 1987-12-15 Hikoroku Sugiura Mixer for continuously mixing fluids
US4844620A (en) 1986-11-24 1989-07-04 Petrolite Corporation System for producing high-internal-phase-ratio emulsion products on a continuous basis
CH674319A5 (en) 1988-03-22 1990-05-31 Miteco Ag
US5157332A (en) 1989-10-13 1992-10-20 The Foxboro Company Three-toroid electrodeless conductivity cell
US5242468A (en) 1991-03-19 1993-09-07 Startec Ventures, Inc. Manufacture of high precision electronic components with ultra-high purity liquids
US5127926A (en) 1991-05-06 1992-07-07 Membrane Technology & Research, Inc. Membrane process for treating pump exhausts
DE4123047A1 (en) 1991-07-12 1993-01-14 Kronseder Maschf Krones METHOD AND DEVICE FOR MIXING BEVERAGE COMPONENTS
DE4135648C1 (en) 1991-10-29 1993-05-13 Erich Netzsch Gmbh & Co Holding Kg, 8672 Selb, De Mixing powdered solid into liq. phase e.g. for paint mfr.
US5980836A (en) 1992-05-26 1999-11-09 E. I. Du Pont De Nemours And Company Apparatus for preparing low-concentration polyaluminosilicate microgels
JP2833365B2 (en) 1992-08-12 1998-12-09 株式会社村田製作所 Acceleration sensor
JP3074366B2 (en) 1993-02-22 2000-08-07 東京エレクトロン株式会社 Processing equipment
US5407526A (en) 1993-06-30 1995-04-18 Intel Corporation Chemical mechanical polishing slurry delivery and mixing system
US5409310A (en) 1993-09-30 1995-04-25 Semitool, Inc. Semiconductor processor liquid spray system with additive blending
EP0646409B1 (en) 1993-10-04 1999-12-08 General Electric Company System for controlling the color of compounded polymer(s) using in-process color measurements
US5722442A (en) 1994-01-07 1998-03-03 Startec Ventures, Inc. On-site generation of ultra-high-purity buffered-HF for semiconductor processing
US5846387A (en) 1994-01-07 1998-12-08 Air Liquide Electronics Chemicals & Services, Inc. On-site manufacture of ultra-high-purity hydrochloric acid for semiconductor processing
US5785820A (en) 1994-01-07 1998-07-28 Startec Ventures, Inc. On-site manufacture of ultra-high-purity hydrofluoric acid for semiconductor processing
WO1996039266A1 (en) 1995-06-05 1996-12-12 Startec Ventures, Inc. On-site generation of ultra-high-purity buffered-hf for semiconductor processing
US5496778A (en) 1994-01-07 1996-03-05 Startec Ventures, Inc. Point-of-use ammonia purification for electronic component manufacture
US5549820A (en) 1994-03-04 1996-08-27 Eastman Kodak Company Apparatus for removing a component from solution
US5622682A (en) 1994-04-06 1997-04-22 Atmi Ecosys Corporation Method for concentration and recovery of halocarbons from effluent gas streams
US5469705A (en) 1994-08-22 1995-11-28 The Nash Engineering Company Heat recovery in a liquid ring pump seal liquid chiller system
JP3141919B2 (en) 1994-10-13 2001-03-07 三菱瓦斯化学株式会社 Chemical liquid preparation apparatus and method
US5522660A (en) 1994-12-14 1996-06-04 Fsi International, Inc. Apparatus for blending and controlling the concentration of a liquid chemical in a diluent liquid
US5924794A (en) 1995-02-21 1999-07-20 Fsi International, Inc. Chemical blending system with titrator control
JPH11506411A (en) 1995-06-05 1999-06-08 スターテック・ベンチャーズ・インコーポレーテッド On-site ammonia purification for electronic component manufacturing.
JP2001527664A (en) 1995-06-05 2001-12-25 スターテック・ベンチャーズ・インコーポレーテッド In-situ mixing system and method of ultrapure chemicals for semiconductor processing
US6050283A (en) 1995-07-07 2000-04-18 Air Liquide America Corporation System and method for on-site mixing of ultra-high-purity chemicals for semiconductor processing
JPH0933538A (en) 1995-07-19 1997-02-07 Toa Medical Electronics Co Ltd Method and unit for preparing reagent
DE59507965D1 (en) 1995-10-05 2000-04-13 Sulzer Chemtech Ag Winterthur Mixing device for mixing a low-viscosity fluid into a high-viscosity fluid
US5632960A (en) 1995-11-07 1997-05-27 Applied Chemical Solutions, Inc. Two-stage chemical mixing system
US5689180A (en) 1995-12-13 1997-11-18 Carlson; Curt S. Isolated electrical power supply
JP3442604B2 (en) 1996-02-15 2003-09-02 株式会社フジキン Method of supplying mixed gas, mixed gas supply device, and semiconductor manufacturing apparatus provided with these
WO1998032526A1 (en) 1997-01-24 1998-07-30 The Regents Of The University Of California Apparatus and method for planar laminar mixing
FR2761902B1 (en) 1997-04-11 1999-05-14 Labeille Sa ULTRA-PURE CHEMICAL DILUTION SYSTEM FOR THE MICRO-ELECTRONIC INDUSTRY
FR2761896B1 (en) 1997-04-11 1999-05-14 Labeille Sa PROCESS AND DEVICE FOR PRODUCING HIGH PURITY CHEMICALS FOR THE MICROELECTRONIC INDUSTRY
JPH1126423A (en) 1997-07-09 1999-01-29 Sugai:Kk Method and apparatus for processing semiconductor wafer and the like
KR100290703B1 (en) 1997-08-26 2001-06-01 윤종용 Silicon wafer cleaning method with fixed quantity supply condition for standard cleaning solution
US6113769A (en) 1997-11-21 2000-09-05 International Business Machines Corporation Apparatus to monitor and add plating solution of plating baths and controlling quality of deposited metal
JP3075350B2 (en) 1997-12-03 2000-08-14 日本電気株式会社 Chemical treatment method and chemical treatment device
US5990014A (en) 1998-01-07 1999-11-23 Memc Electronic Materials, Inc. In situ wafer cleaning process
US6224778B1 (en) 1998-03-18 2001-05-01 Charles T. Peltzer Method for manufacturing a system for mixing fluids
KR20010072569A (en) 1998-04-09 2001-07-31 추후제출 Automated chemical process control system
US7871249B2 (en) 1998-04-16 2011-01-18 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Systems and methods for managing fluids using a liquid ring pump
US6799883B1 (en) * 1999-12-20 2004-10-05 Air Liquide America L.P. Method for continuously blending chemical solutions
US20070070803A1 (en) 1998-04-16 2007-03-29 Urquhart Karl J Point-of-use process control blender systems and corresponding methods
US7344297B2 (en) 1998-04-16 2008-03-18 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Method and apparatus for asynchronous blending and supply of chemical solutions
US7980753B2 (en) 1998-04-16 2011-07-19 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Systems and methods for managing fluids in a processing environment using a liquid ring pump and reclamation system
US20070119816A1 (en) 1998-04-16 2007-05-31 Urquhart Karl J Systems and methods for reclaiming process fluids in a processing environment
US6432214B2 (en) 1998-07-10 2002-08-13 Semitool, Inc. Cleaning apparatus
JP2000265945A (en) 1998-11-10 2000-09-26 Uct Kk Chemical supplying pump, chemical supplying device, chemical supplying system, substrate cleaning device, chemical supplying method, and substrate cleaning method
US6247838B1 (en) 1998-11-24 2001-06-19 The Boc Group, Inc. Method for producing a liquid mixture having a predetermined concentration of a specified component
JP3212958B2 (en) 1998-12-11 2001-09-25 九州日本電気株式会社 Chemical solution concentration control device
US6464799B1 (en) 1999-06-01 2002-10-15 Applied Materials, Inc. Method for managing a fluid level associated with a substrate processing tank
US6120175A (en) 1999-07-14 2000-09-19 The Porter Company/Mechanical Contractors Apparatus and method for controlled chemical blending
US6227222B1 (en) 2000-01-05 2001-05-08 Fluid Compressor Corp. Closed oil liquid ring gas compression system with a suction injection port
CN101274230A (en) 2000-07-31 2008-10-01 迅捷公司 Method and apparatus for mixing process material
US7905653B2 (en) 2001-07-31 2011-03-15 Mega Fluid Systems, Inc. Method and apparatus for blending process materials
TWI298826B (en) 2001-02-06 2008-07-11 Hirama Lab Co Ltd Purified developer producing equipment and method
TWI298423B (en) 2001-02-06 2008-07-01 Nagase & Co Ltd Developer producing equipment and method
TWI224824B (en) 2001-03-06 2004-12-01 Mosel Vitelic Inc Method of increasing cleaning-water recycling rate of chemical cleaning platen in semiconductor manufacture process
US6917424B2 (en) 2001-03-19 2005-07-12 E. I. Du Pont De Nemours And Company Process for manufacturing pigment dispersions
JP3753624B2 (en) 2001-04-03 2006-03-08 株式会社ナカキン Mixing device for sugar content adjustment
US6766818B2 (en) 2001-04-06 2004-07-27 Akrion, Llc Chemical concentration control device
US6584989B2 (en) 2001-04-17 2003-07-01 International Business Machines Corporation Apparatus and method for wet cleaning
FI109926B (en) 2001-04-20 2002-10-31 Valmet Raisio Oy Method and system for controlling the coating recipe
CN1602538A (en) 2001-11-13 2005-03-30 Fsi国际公司 Advanced process control for immersion processing
JP4456308B2 (en) 2001-12-05 2010-04-28 富士通マイクロエレクトロニクス株式会社 Chemical supply device
FR2833365B1 (en) 2001-12-10 2004-05-14 Air Liquide METHOD FOR REGULATING THE TITLE OF A SOLUTION, CONTROL DEVICE FOR THIS REGULATION AND SYSTEM INCLUDING SUCH A DEVICE
JP2003200031A (en) 2001-12-28 2003-07-15 Nakakin:Kk Mixing device for concentration adjustment
DE10214331A1 (en) 2002-03-28 2003-10-23 Nash Elmo Ind Gmbh Pump device, method for operating a pump device and its use in a steam turbine system
US7153690B2 (en) * 2002-10-04 2006-12-26 Advanced Technology Materials, Inc. Real-time component monitoring and replenishment system for multicomponent fluids
US20040125688A1 (en) 2002-12-30 2004-07-01 Kelley Milton I. Closed automatic fluid mixing system
JP4345313B2 (en) 2003-01-24 2009-10-14 株式会社日立製作所 Operation management method of storage system based on policy
WO2006010121A2 (en) 2004-07-09 2006-01-26 Entegris, Inc. Closed-loop delivery system
US20070109912A1 (en) 2005-04-15 2007-05-17 Urquhart Karl J Liquid ring pumping and reclamation systems in a processing environment
US7743783B2 (en) 2006-04-04 2010-06-29 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Method and apparatus for recycling process fluids
US8235580B2 (en) * 2006-10-12 2012-08-07 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Reclaim function for semiconductor processing systems
US20090090164A1 (en) 2007-10-08 2009-04-09 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Method for volumetrically calibrating a liquid flow controller while maintaining the liquid in a closed system
US8191397B2 (en) 2007-12-12 2012-06-05 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Methods for checking and calibrating concentration sensors in a semiconductor processing chamber
US20160296902A1 (en) * 2016-06-17 2016-10-13 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Deterministic feedback blender

Cited By (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US10739795B2 (en) * 2016-06-17 2020-08-11 Air Liquide Electronics U.S. Lp Deterministic feedback blender
WO2021108739A1 (en) 2019-11-27 2021-06-03 Diversified Fluid Solutions, Llc On-demand in-line-blending and supply of chemicals
US11318431B2 (en) 2019-11-27 2022-05-03 Diversified Fluid Solutions, Llc On-demand in-line-blending and supply of chemicals
EP4065313A4 (en) * 2019-11-27 2023-08-02 Diversified Fluid Solutions, LLC On-demand in-line-blending and supply of chemicals
EP4603226A2 (en) 2019-11-27 2025-08-20 Diversified Fluid Solutions, LLC On-demand in-line-blending and supply of chemicals
EP4603226A3 (en) * 2019-11-27 2025-10-22 Diversified Fluid Solutions, LLC On-demand in-line-blending and supply of chemicals
WO2024026993A1 (en) * 2022-08-05 2024-02-08 福建省龙氟新材料有限公司 Automatic batching control system for ammonium fluoride preparation and control method thereof

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
US10739795B2 (en) 2020-08-11
US20190196519A1 (en) 2019-06-27

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US10739795B2 (en) Deterministic feedback blender
US7344298B2 (en) Method and apparatus for blending process materials
US6799883B1 (en) Method for continuously blending chemical solutions
US6923568B2 (en) Method and apparatus for blending process materials
US7905653B2 (en) Method and apparatus for blending process materials
KR20220138361A (en) Advanced fluid processing methods and systems
EP3700351B1 (en) Real-time quality monitoring of beverage batch production using densitometry
KR101263537B1 (en) Point of Use Process Control Blender Systems and Corresponding Methods
KR20100116853A (en) Apparatus for preparing chemical composition using continuous mixer
EP4065313B1 (en) On-demand in-line-blending and supply of chemicals
TW201836994A (en) Method and apparatus for supplying water of specified concentration
EP4102990B1 (en) Real-time quality monitoring of beverage batch production using densitometry
EP1749565A1 (en) Method and apparatus for blending process materials
JP2001009257A (en) Mixing device

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AS Assignment

Owner name: AIR LIQUIDE ELECTRONICS U.S. LP, TEXAS

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:O'DOUGHERTY, KEVIN T.;REEL/FRAME:040807/0564

Effective date: 20161201

STPP Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general

Free format text: NON FINAL ACTION MAILED

STCB Information on status: application discontinuation

Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION